Document Type : Research Paper


1 Iğdır University, Faculty of Science and Arts, Iğdır, Turkey.

2 Bitlis Eren University, Faculty of Science and Arts, Bitlis, Turkey.

3 Department of Mathematics, University of New Mexico, 705 Gurley Avenue, Gallup, NM 87301, USA.


The main concept of neutrosophy is that any idea has not only a certain degree of truth but also a degree of falsity and indeterminacy in its own right. Although there are many applications of neutrosophy in different disciplines, the incorporation of its logic in education and psychology is rather scarce compared to other fields. In this study, the Satisfaction with Life Scale was converted into the neutrosophic form and the results were compared in terms of confirmatory analysis by convolutional neural networks. To sum up, two different formulas are proposed at the end of the study to determine the validity of any scale in terms of neutrosophy. While the Lawshe methodology concentrates on the dominating opinions of experts limited by a one-dimensional data space analysis, it should be advocated that the options can be placed in three-dimensional data space in the neutrosophic analysis . The effect may be negligible for a small number of items and participants, but it may create enormous changes for a large number of items and participants. Secondly, the degree of freedom of Lawshe technique is only 1 in 3D space, whereas the degree of freedom of neutrosophical scale is 3, so researchers have to employ three separate parameters of 3D space in neutrosophical scale while a resarcher is restricted in a 1D space in Lawshe technique in 3D space. The third distinction relates to the analysis of statistics. The Lawhe technical approach focuses on the experts' ratio of choices, whereas the importance and correlation level of each item for the analysis in neutrosophical logic are analysed. The fourth relates to the opinion of experts. The Lawshe technique is focused on expert opinions, yet in many ways the word expert is not defined. In a neutrosophical scale, however, researchers primarily address actual participants in order to understand whether the item is comprehended or opposed to or is imprecise. In this research, an alternative technique is presented to construct a valid scale in which the scale first is transformed into a neutrosophical one before being compared using neural networks. It may be concluded that each measuring scale is used for the desired aim to evaluate how suitable and representative the measurements obtained are so that its content validity can be evaluated.


Main Subjects

  1. J. (1987). The Psychometric Approach. In: Models of Psychological Space. Springer, New York, NY.
  2. Özgüven, İ. E. (2011). Psychological tests. Ankara: Pdrem Yayınları. (In Torkish).
  3. Atılgan, H. (2009). Measurement and evaluation in education. Ankara: Anı Yayıncılık. (In Torkish).
  4. Fraenkel, J. R. Wallen, E. & Hyun, H. H. (2012). How to design and evaluate research in education. USA: The McGraw-Hill Companies.
  5. Tavşancıl, E. (2010). Measuring attitudes and data analysis with SPSS. Ankara: Nobel Yayıncılık. (In Torkish).
  6. Hinkin, T. (1995). A review of scale development practices in the study of organizations. Journal of management, 21(5), 967-988.
  7. Şencan, H. (2005). Reliability and validity. Ankara: Seçkin Yayıncılık. (In Torkish).
  8. Carmines, E. G. & Zeller, R. A. (1979). Reliability and validity assessment. Newbury Park, Ca, Sage.
  9. Bartlett, J. W., & Frost, C. (2008). Reliability, repeatability and reproducibility: analysis of measurement errors in continuous variables. Ultrasound in obstetrics and gynecology: the official journal of the international society of ultrasound in obstetrics and gynecology31(4), 466-475.
  10. Moser, C. A. & Kalton, G. (1989). Survey methods ın social ınvestigation, Aldershot, Gower.
  11. Rosen, A. M. (2019). Effective research methods for any project. USA: Teaching Company.
  12. Hergüner, S. (2010). Basic concepts of the use of measurement tools. Türkiye Çocuk ve Genç Psikiyatrisi Derneği, İstanbul. (In Torkish).
  13. Field, A. P. (2005). Discovering statistics using SPSS. Sage Publications Inc.
  14. Taherdoost, H. (2016). Validity and reliability of the research instrument; how to test the validation of a questionnaire/survey in a research. How to test the validation of a questionnaire/survey in a research.
  15. Slavec, A., & Drnovšek, M. (2012). A perspective on scale development in entrepreneurship research. Economic and business review14(1).
  16. Barnhart, H. X., Haber, M. J., & Lin, L. I. (2007). An overview on assessing agreement with continuous measurements. Journal of biopharmaceutical statistics17(4), 529-569.
  17. Vanderstoep, S. W., & Johnson, D. D. (2008). Research methods for everyday life: Blending qualitative and quantitative approaches (Vol. 32). John Wiley & Sons.
  18. Souza, A. C. D., Alexandre, N. M. C., & Guirardello, E. D. B. (2017). Psychometric properties in instruments evaluation of reliability and validity. Epidemiologia e serviços de saúde26, 649-659.
  19. Mertens, D. M.(2010). Research and evaluation in education and psychology: integrating diversity with quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methods. USA: Sage.
  20. Zadeh, L. A. (1965). Fuzzy sets. Control, 8, 338–353.
  21. Atanassov, K. T. (1986). Intuitionistic fuzzy sets. Fuzzy Sets Syst. 20, 87–96.
  22. Smarandache, F. (1998). Neutrosophy: neutrosophic probability, set, and logic : analytic synthesis & synthetic analysis. American Research Press.
  23. Diener, E. D., Emmons, R. A., Larsen, R. J., & Griffin, S. (1985). The satisfaction with life scale. Journal of personality assessment49(1), 71-75.
  24. Dağlı, A. ve Baysal, N. (2016). Adaptation of satisfaction with life scale into turkish: validity and reliability study. Elektronik sosyal bilimler dergisi , 15(59), 1250-1262.
  25. Lawshe, C. H. (1975). A quantitative approach to content validity. Personnel psychology28(4), 563-575.
  26. Wilson, F. R., Pan, W., & Schumsky, D. A. (2012). Recalculation of the critical values for Lawshe’s content validity ratio. Measurement and evaluation in counseling and development45(3), 197-210.
  27. Ayre, C., & Scally, A. J. (2014). Critical values for Lawshe’s content validity ratio: revisiting the original methods of calculation. Measurement and evaluation in counseling and development47(1), 79-86.
  28. Gilbert, G. & Prion, S. (2016). Making sense of methods and measurement: Lawshe's content validity ındex. Clinical simulation in nursing, 12(12), 530-531.
  29. Sartre, J. P. (2015). Being and nothingness. Central works of philosophy: the twentieth century: Moore to popper4, 155.
  30. Nait Aicha, A., Englebienne, G., Van Schooten, K. S., Pijnappels, M., & Kröse, B. (2018). Deep learning to predict falls in older adults based on daily-life trunk accelerometry. Sensors18(5), 1654.
  31.  IBM SPSS Neural Networks 21. (2011). IBM SPSS neural networks 21 manual, USA: IBM.
  32. Çevik, A., Topal, S., & Smarandache, F. (2018). Neutrosophic logic based quantum computing. Symmetry10(11), 656.
  33. Smarandache, F. (2005). A unifying field in logics: neutrosophic logic. Neutrosophy, neutrosophic set, neutrosophic probability: neutrsophic logic. Neutrosophy, neutrosophic set, neutrosophic probability. Infinite Study.
  34. Taş, F., Topal, S., & Smarandache, F. (2018). Clustering neutrosophic data sets and neutrosophic valued metric spaces. Symmetry10(10), 430.
  35. Doğan, İ. Doğan, N. (2019). An Overview evaluation of the content validity used in scale development studies. Turkiye Klinikleri J Biostat, 11(2), 143-51. DOI: 5336/biostatic.2019-65953
  36. Bertea, E., & Zaiţ, P. A. (2013). Scale validity in exploratory stages of research. Management and marketing journal11(1), 38-46.
  37. AboElHamd, E., Shamma, H. M., Saleh, M., & El-Khodary, I. (2021). Neutrosophic logic theory and applications. Neutrosophic sets and systems41, 30-51.
  38. Smarandache, F. (2019). Introduction to neutrosophic sociology (neutrosociology). Infinite Study.
  39. Martínez, C. R., Hidalgo, G. A., Matos, M. A., & Smarandache, F. (2020). Neutrosophy for survey analysis in social sciences(Vol. 37). Infinite Study.
  40. Leyva-Vázquez, M. (2018). Neutrosophy: New advances in the treatment of uncertainty. (In Spanish). Pons Publishing House / Pons asbl.
  41. Smarandache, F. (2015). Neutrosophic social structures specificities. Social sciences and education research review2(1), 3-10.
  42. Khan, Z., Gulistan, M., Kadry, S., Chu, Y., & Lane-Krebs, K. (2020). On scale parameter monitoring of the Rayleigh distributed data using a new design. IEEE access8, 188390-188400.
  43. Khan, Z., Gulistan, M., Hashim, R., Yaqoob, N., & Chammam, W. (2020). Design of S-control chart for neutrosophic data: An application to manufacturing industry. Journal of intelligent & fuzzy systems38(4), 4743-4751.
  44. Khan, Z., Gulistan, M., Chammam, W., Kadry, S., & Nam, Y. (2020). A new dispersion control chart for handling the neutrosophic data. IEEE access8, 96006-96015.